Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:56:21 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] IPX and NWFS to be killed in -current. Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1041206165120.74271A-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <79552.1102327805@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > We are aiming 6.X at production readiness around start of 2006. > > By that time IPX and NWFS are not really interesting and nobody seems to > be interested in doing the SMPng work on them. > > I propose we remove them from -current before the 6.x freeze starts next > spring. FYI, I have a substantial work in progress in the netperf branch to bring fine-grained locking to IPX/SPX, as well as to clean up a number of elements of its implementions (for example, moving the the queue(9) macros. While I'm currently a bit stalled on it due to being overwhelmed at work (etc), my hope was to get the Giant-free IPX pieces working early next year. I think there's a reference to this on the SMPng page showing the task as last worked on in April (probably accurate). I don't have the ability to experiment with or test the nwfs code at this time. However, there are occasional bug reports so one assumes that someone must be using it. I'm not necessarily opposed to removing IPX/SPX on the basis that it is hardly a mainstream protocol component anymore, but I think it's probably not accurate to say that no one is interested in doing the locking work for the IPX parts (since I'm working on it :-). Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1041206165120.74271A-100000>